About the Author

Does Chris Brown deserve ‘nostars ever’?

Chris Brown may be a shit human being, but that doesn’t mean his music is beyond fair critical appraisal, writes CAITLIN WELSH following Chloe Papas’ infamous “no stars ever” review.

Last week, Chloe Papas’ scorched-earth review of Chris Brown’s new album Fortune spread across the interwebs, trailing righteous applause and gratified commenters in its wake. “BEST REVIEW YOU’LL EVER READ,” crowed several American blogs. In essence, she said the album has no artistic value whatsoever. It is also often, like far too much commercial R&B and hip-hop, incredibly anti-women in its themes. Moreover, Chris Brown is a piece of shit who has shown no genuine remorse for his felony assault conviction against then-girlfriend Rihanna in 2009, only a petulant resentment that people continue to mention it at all. I agree with essentially everything she said.

But I find it hard to believe that Papas went to her editor and asked to review Brown’s latest album because she was interested in hearing what innovative new direction Brown’s music was taking. Most music critics have at one point or another taken a review assignment licking their lips at the prospect of a good old-fashioned Christians-vs-lions evisceration, or because they already have an opinion formed or half-formed and would very much like to have an audience for it. A good music critic tells you what they really think about an album. A good music critic is able to set aside preconceptions, to admit when they are wrong or simply surprised by a record. Papas was never in any danger of enjoying or being surprised by Fortune, but even if she had been, that was not the purpose of the piece. Her inability or refusal to engage with the actual music at all is not only amateurish, but doesn’t add to the conversation at all.

People have acknowledged that slamming your girlfriend’s head in a car door is wrong. This is excellent, and worth celebrating. The outcry against Brown following his felony assault conviction has raised awareness of what is obfuscatingly and euphemistically called domestic violence. Every time I see a smart public figure publicly denouncing Brown and/or his defenders – particularly a man – I rejoice a little. But if you’ve ever tweeted anything negative about Brown, you might’ve come across Team Breezy.

While many of them are simply pop fans who can’t or won’t let his awfulness interfere with their enjoyment of his music, there are others who clearly spend all their time looking for critics of Brown to abuse. Once they pop up, it can be fun to bait them. They tend to be just on the wrong side of literate; use a lot of all-caps; and when backed into a corner, will often drop something like, “WHO MADE YOU GOD TO JUDGE ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?” Even more horrifyingly, many of them tweeted after his Grammys performance that they’d, like, totally let him beat them any time.

They are called Team Breezy by themselves and by Brown. He thanks them a lot. While it’s become de rigeur for every pop star’s glittery minion army to have their own demonym, there’s something on the nose, even a little etymologically sinister about the adversarial vibe here. If they are Team Breezy, who are we? Are we The Opposition? Team Rihanna? Team Drake? Team Not Beating Women?

The arguments that both Brown and his followers spout in his defence tend to run along one of two lines. One is to point out all the other entertainers who have beaten, stabbed, robbed, raped, bludgeoned, snorted, crashed, abused or otherwise fucked up real bad, and been welcomed back into the fold after some or no time at all. From Errol Flynn to Charlie Sheen and all the woman-bashing Browns (James, Bobby, etc), celebrity history is full of awful humans. The difference is Chris Brown happens to have committed his crime in an era of TMZ, the 24-hour news cycle and Twitter. We all saw a horrifying picture of what he actually did to his girlfriend, so yes, few of us have rushed to forgive him.

But the other criticism levelled at writers is that we are attacking the man, not the music. Papas certainly prioritised lambasting Brown’s horrible-person status over tearing into the music. She’s far from the only one taking this tack, just the most visible right now. I’ve done it myself, albeit on Twitter and not in a published review. Chad Taylor, a critic for an Iowa paper, published a six-word review of the album: “Chris Brown hits women. Enough said.” By all means, refuse to engage with Chris Brown’s music, give it no “stars ever”, but then you also have to give “no stars ever” to the industry that supports him, the performers who defend him, the producers who work with him and all the celebrities throughout the years who have ever hit a woman, child or a puppy. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite, like it or not.

“If we choose to review Chris Brown’s record, we have a responsibility to approach it with the respect and open mind we give to anything else.”

Loudly proclaiming that you’re never going to pay attention to him in a published review could be seen – if you’re cynical – as piggybacking off Brown’s notoriety for your own ends. That’s exactly the same as all the artists who have made music with Brown and stuck by him. Indeed, the commercial imperative of working with a man who generates such tremendous publicity outweighs any moral compulsion that might say it’s best to ignore him. As music critics, if we choose to review Chris Brown’s record, we have a responsibility to approach it with the respect and open mind we give to anything else. Prepare to be surprised; engage with the music itself; and, sure, let your preconceptions of the artist’s personal life and failings inform your opinion.

But the responsibility of the music critic, such as it is, is to talk about the music. Writers from all over have “reviewed” Lana Del Rey’s flaccid palimpsest of a record by talking about the hype and her lips. They’re “reviewing” The Newsroom by talking about The West Wing and Sorkin’s shitty behaviour towards a female interviewer. If you’re reviewing Chris Brown – if you’re going to take exposure and column space away from a great record in order to take potshots at a performer everyone knows is a completely shit human – tear this obtuse, misogynistic and derivative album a new one and let that speak for itself. Be a sharp, sly voice for critical and human integrity, in a sea of people bleating the obvious and feeding the trolls.

Facebook member?

See, everyone's saying "She's judging the man, not the music!" And yet the first 3 paragraphs are about the music. They could be about anyone's obnoxious, nauseating, mysoginist pop album.

I really liked the review - it's shit music by a shit human being, and even if he wasn't, it would still be shit music.

Could've stopped after those first three pars, though, and I would have been sold on not buying the thing ever. It's an opinion piece though. That's fine, I don't care. It has an argument that you can evaluate!

That means it's far more justifiable than the vid of a monkey pissing on itself that masqueraded as a review of ... Jet ( i forget?).

I dont think it's just pop music, either. And that ties into my other point, which I forgot to put in my first post.

Music doesn't exist in a vacuum.

When an album is released, there's a school of thought that says the album should be considered purely on its merits, not on anything else. But that's completely ridiculous, and unfeasible.

And it's also not the way people consume music. Every song we listen to, every album, it's all informed by a million factors other than the noises on the disc. We take into account where we heard it, what we do or don't know about the artist, how we liked/didn't like their previous work, the things they've said, the things they wear. Different people weigh certain factors differently, but they're all out there, and they all affect our listening habits, consciously and subconsciously.

what i can't reconcile is - domestic abuse rates are horrifyingly high. there are hundreds or thousands of well known musicians. surely a portion of them have been perpetrators of domestic abuse. i've never liked chris brown's music, or his personality, to be honest. i wonder what would happen if we stopped doing business with all perpetrators of domestic abuse the world over. maybe i'm a little cynical but this is nothing more than people trying to score a cheap point by positioning themselves against the most reviled individual in pop culture. and again, to be clear, i'm not a fan of the guy in any respect.

I dont think it's just pop music, either. And that ties into my other point, which I forgot to put in my first post.

Music doesn't exist in a vacuum.

When an album is released, there's a school of thought that says the album should be considered purely on its merits, not on anything else. But that's completely ridiculous, and unfeasible.

And it's also not the way people consume music. Every song we listen to, every album, it's all informed by a million factors other than the noises on the disc. We take into account where we heard it, what we do or don't know about the artist, how we liked/didn't like their previous work, the things they've said, the things they wear. Different people weigh certain factors differently, but they're all out there, and they all affect our listening habits, consciously and subconsciously.

This. For instance, someone who is aware of Kanye West's public persona would find listening to My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy a completely different experience to someone who doesn't know anything about him.

Why shouldn't the public position itself against Chris Brown on that basis.

The fact is that the public should position itself against many more perpetrators of particularly unsavoury behaviour (of whatever kind). Until the wider population makes this type of behaviour completely unacceptable, even for celebrity superstars, it will still be accepted on some level.

The obvious reality is that these stupid girls would not enjoy being assaulted, even by Chris Brown if it was actually happening.

1. We were 100% certain that the person was a domestic abuser, and
2. The person had taken no steps, either physical or emotional, to atone for their crime, or improve themselves so as not to commit it again.

Both of these apply to Chris Brown.

This review didn't feel like someone trying to score a cheap point, though?

I think it affirms it - without background, or preconceptions, or context, 4:33 is just silence. It's everything that is around it that give it meaning, like that whole "you can't observe something without changing what you're observing" scientific principle.

in a word... yes. morally i don't want to enjoy anything that comes from him, but that's just me. makes me sick how he seems to have shown no compassion, nor grown as a musician or a person. or maybe it's the fact that he gets to have sex with rihanna. again.

Mark Wahlberg committed some outrageous acts of racially motivated assault when he was a teenager and is now an acclaimed Hollywood star. Should we revile him and his work now because of these horrible things he did?

But on the other hand he served prison time for these crimes and has apparently spent a lot of time trying to find the people he harmed in order to repent for his crimes, not to mention the large amount of charity work he works in.

Our justice system and the justice system of many western nations is based on not only punishment for crime, but the idea of rehabilitation and redemption for transgressors... but should we accept people who commit these kind of acts be accepted back into society? It's a hard answer.

Mark Wahlberg committed some outrageous acts of racially motivated assault when he was a teenager and is now an acclaimed Hollywood star. Should we revile him and his work now because of these horrible things he did?

But on the other hand he served prison time for these crimes and has apparently spent a lot of time trying to find the people he harmed in order to repent for his crimes, not to mention the large amount of charity work he works in.

Our justice system and the justice system of many western nations is based on not only punishment for crime, but the idea of rehabilitation and redemption for transgressors... but should we accept people who commit these kind of acts be accepted back into society? It's a hard answer.

I absolutely think people who have atoned for their crimes need to be forgiven. Remorse, rehabilitation etc. are crucial in someone overcoming their past indiscretions.

It is important as a society that we allow these people to be accepted back into society with a clean slate. Lots of people make mistakes.

Context is part of life. Everything you experience is put into context with other experience and that is how you arrive at your perception.

It's somewhat similar to a debut album by a band being viewed differently to a later album by a band. If a band's third album is for all intents and purposes equal to their first in terms of their playing, songwriting, lyrics etc. it will naturally be perceived to be weaker because you have an expectation that they will have progressed. Even though the songwriting might be just as good, the fact that you have essentially heard it before lessens the impact.

Mark Wahlberg committed some outrageous acts of racially motivated assault when he was a teenager and is now an acclaimed Hollywood star. Should we revile him and his work now because of these horrible things he did?

But on the other hand he served prison time for these crimes and has apparently spent a lot of time trying to find the people he harmed in order to repent for his crimes, not to mention the large amount of charity work he works in.

Our justice system and the justice system of many western nations is based on not only punishment for crime, but the idea of rehabilitation and redemption for transgressors... but should we accept people who commit these kind of acts be accepted back into society? It's a hard answer.

The fact is though, the pathetic fuckbucket in question served no jail time at all and instead ended up picking up rubbish on the side of the road for a few weeks, and with the exception of a few high profile identities within the hip hop scene (Nas, Jay- Z and Drake obviously) has been seemingly welcomed back with open arms by the majority of the music industry including 'that' performance at the Grammys which saw him recieve a standing ovation. Since that performance instead of showing any form of meaningful remorse, he responds with crap like 'u a h8er', 'only god can judge me', 'i grow from my mistakes' etc, when questioned about the assualt and then releases crap like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdaaA6mLaWU
after doing this - http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XWerpwE6FHU/0.jpg

Bottom line, I dont think I can ever listen to any artist who supports this guy, dude should still be on parole. :mad:

The fact is though, the pathetic fuckbucket in question served no jail time at all and instead ended up picking up rubbish on the side of the road for a few weeks, and with the exception of a few high profile identities within the hip hop scene (Nas, Jay- Z and Drake obviously) has been seemingly welcomed back with open arms by the majority of the music industry including 'that' performance at the Grammys which saw him recieve a standing ovation. Since that performance instead of showing any form of meaningful remorse, he responds with crap like 'u a h8er', 'only god can judge me', 'i grow from my mistakes' etc, when questioned about the assualt and then releases crap like this youtube.com/watch?v=82c_LKgZRLE

after doing this - http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XWerpwE6FHU/0.jpg

Bottom line, I dont think I can ever listen to any artist who supports this guy, dude should still be on parole. :mad:

Oh for sure, I totally agree. Fuck Chris Brown.

I was just trying to raise the question of wether people believe in redeption from time served.

i've been toying with writing something about this and sending it to fasterlouder. you've beaten me to it and i'm glad you did. this is much better than anything i could write. a very level-headed piece about a topic just begging for hyperbole. congrats.

i think this is completely biased. why say there is no upside to any of his album unless you just completely dislike the man? his song 'don't judge me' is about his feelings but only someone who is narrow-minded can't see that. also, the critic is saying he has absolutely no talent, yet he has gotten praise from many people much more important than this critic.

and if you listened to any of his other songs that aren't on this album such as 'i needed you', 'how i feel', or 'she ain't you', you would see that he does have talent.

and what's wrong with songs about partying? in a world where not everything is as perfect as it seems. where i'm from (usa) there is a reccession and a loss of jobs. songs about partying makes us forget about all that. it's called fun, you should try it. and last time i checked, chris brown was an american singer/rapper/dancer/actor.
so maybe you should put away all harsh feelings on his past and actually listen and analyze the music. find out the meaning and see why he would have reason to write a song like that and maybe, just maybe, you'll become a better critic. kay?

Did you read this article? This article actually discusses the very point you raised, it isn't, in fact, an article tearing down Chris Brown, but an article discussing the merits of seperating the music from the man in a critical review.

I haven't listened to the album and don't like Chris Brown at all.
The social network defenders of the good are ridiculous though. I don't know why he is the one they have chosen to death ride when there are numerous artists that have fucked up and managed to get the world to conveniently forget.
The amount of people championing Drake for responding with violence was quite sad. The fact that more women were injured due to his actions was predictably lost.

i think this is completely biased. why say there is no upside to any of his album unless you just completely dislike the man? his song 'don't judge me' is about his feelings but only someone who is narrow-minded can't see that. also, the critic is saying he has absolutely no talent, yet he has gotten praise from many people much more important than this critic.

and if you listened to any of his other songs that aren't on this album such as 'i needed you', 'how i feel', or 'she ain't you', you would see that he does have talent.

and what's wrong with songs about partying? in a world where not everything is as perfect as it seems. where i'm from (usa) there is a reccession and a loss of jobs. songs about partying makes us forget about all that. it's called fun, you should try it. and last time i checked, chris brown was an american singer/rapper/dancer/actor.
so maybe you should put away all harsh feelings on his past and actually listen and analyze the music. find out the meaning and see why he would have reason to write a song like that and maybe, just maybe, you'll become a better critic. kay?

I award this post NO LIKES EVER.

But srsly, I think another extremely important point to consider is not only did Chris Brown not do the time for his crimes, he has also showed little evidence of remorse, and continues to be a fuckhead to this day e.g. homophobic comments about Frank Ocean.

If he were to ever be forgiven for this incident, he might need to actually grow a pair of balls and try and use his fame to provide some sort of positive influence in the world, rather than just being a fuckwit.

I'm a bit late on this, but I'm pretty sure Woody never drugged and raped a 13 year old. The girl he was with was at least old enough when he started having sex with her. (I think, I can't be bothered looking it up).

But srsly, I think another extremely important point to consider is not only did Chris Brown not do the time for his crimes, he has also showed little evidence of remorse, and continues to be a fuckhead to this day e.g. homophobic comments about Frank Ocean.

If he were to ever be forgiven for this incident, he might need to actually grow a pair of balls and try and use his fame to provide some sort of positive influence in the world, rather than just being a fuckwit.

This is all bullshit though. He was convicted and served a sentence. Do you think everyone that has hit a woman serves jail time?
He has shown remorse a number of times but again that is always conveniently forgotten.
I didn't see the no homo comment as a big deal. I am compromised though because I use it all the time, my gay brother doesn't seem to mind.

Where were all the social defenders after Coachella? There was hologram of a rapist! Imagine how upset the victim would have felt to see her rapist reanimated before a cheering crowd?

Chris Brown should take notes, die and all will be forgotten.

Seriously dude, I know you enjoy taking the opposing view to every other human being on the internet, but are you seriously going to in this case?

At the end of the day, he beat the shit out of a human being, was not punished for it, and has continued to do wrongs since then. And why are you continuing to focus on Drake starting a fight with Chris Brown? From initial accounts that I read it seems that Chris Brown was the one who initiated the physical aspect of the dispute, after Drake rejected a peace-offering bottle of champagne he sent over to his table.

Inciting nightclub violence injuring multiple people? Making homophobic slurs against Frank Ocean? Showed little remorse for the crime he did commit? The fact he has so much fame and influence that he has young people thinking it's ok to behave in that way?

I dunno dude, take your fucking pick.

At the end of the day, you can hate whoever you like for doing shitty things. If you were to hate everybody that has done shitty things, you'd hate almost everyone in the whole world including yourself. I think in this case though there are several reasons to justify disliking Chris Brown, and people don't need to be questioned or judged for doing so.

Seriously dude, I know you enjoy taking the opposing view to every other human being on the internet, but are you seriously going to in this case?

At the end of the day, he beat the shit out of a human being, was not punished for it, and has continued to do wrongs since then. And why are you continuing to focus on Drake starting a fight with Chris Brown? From initial accounts that I read it seems that Chris Brown was the one who initiated the physical aspect of the dispute, after Drake rejected a peace-offering bottle of champagne he sent over to his table.

No, I oppose pillocks that refuse the facts. You say he wasn't punished which is incorrect. You say he never showed remorse, also incorrect. I don't know what reports you are talking about but the injured parties have all stated that Drake instigated the altercation.
I am not defending him at all and the suggestion is asinine. At the end of the day he fucked up big time and committed a crime and was punished for it. I have a problem with the internet knights of peace who choose to ignore reports and facts to suit their agenda.

Inciting nightclub violence injuring multiple people? Making homophobic slurs against Frank Ocean? Showed little remorse for the crime he did commit? The fact he has so much fame and influence that he has young people thinking it's ok to behave in that way?

[URL="http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/138880/20110428/chris-brown-s-charity-work-for-children-while-on-tour-in-australia.htm#.UCTMKaOH98E"]Chris Brown’s charity work for children while on tour in Australia

interesting debate. it's something that's often on my mind especially because i often cop it for being a kanye fan. people love to point out how much of a jerk he is and what he did to T.Swift. i always respond saying i don't like to think of anything but the music he makes. i guess it's only fair i apply the same approach to chris brown. but violence against women particularly in the manner in which he committed that crime is a little harder to look past.

either way don't care too much for Brown but i do love that line in Park&Rec where Tom says "on a scale of 1 to Chris Brown, how angry are you?"

I don't actually see where I suggested you were defending him, but ok dude.
At the end of the day I honestly don't really give a fuck what people think about Chris Brown. I choose to dislike him based on my own personal reasons. And what are you trying to prove with the Tupac thing? Should I like Chris Brown because Tupac raped someone? Does that mean I should then forgive Tupac because worse crimes have been committed? Derp.

if the reviewer thinks it's that bad, that's their opinion. i bet there's other one's that gave it a few stars or something. who cares if someone said the album is shit, would there be that much of a problem if they gave it 5 stars?

and on that whole personal point getting involved with the judging of the music, of course it does and it always will. music is an extension of the person themselves so if this guy is an obnoxious violent asshole then i don't think the stuff he did should be ignored when he puts out some music.

I'm sure everyone who finds Brown to be a disgusting human being feels the same way about everyone else that has 'done just as bad, if not worse'. But this is an article about a very recent review of Chris Brown's album, so naturally, the focus is Chris Brown. I don't think anyone is selectively hating here...it's just the point of conversation.

Admittedly though, the fact that he's just another arrogant pop star who continuously churns out the same commercial R&B crap as every other pop star makes it that much easier to hate on him. Personally, I couldn't stand the guy even before he beat the shit out of Rihanna.

i don't think that papas had any preconceived ideas on what would result from her review. it seemed an open and honest account of the music and the man. it's not her fault it went "viral". i certainly don't think she "went to her editior and asked to review the music" but more so probably landed the review afer drawing a short straw.

as for caitlin welsh, i'd have to question why you bothered writing an in-depth dissection / analysis / critique follow up article to what was clearly a piss-take write up on a piss-take of a man (sorry, i can't even call him an artist).

the only reason i read your "feature article" is i wanted to see what the fuss was all about. at least you're getting your name out there off the back of an accidental piece of journalism brilliance.

I remember reading back when the incident occurred that supposedly Rihanna had given Brown Herpes, and that was why he exploded. Not that that justifies violence, just points to his state of mind. Chris Brown does seem to be getting singled out compared to a lot of other famous people. And not all of the perps are men. Look at how Tiger Woods ex was treated by the media after going at him with a 9 iron, she was the hero because she had been cheated on. Yet she had a weapon. Double Standards.

Fair call I guess, she didn't actually hit him though, and as far as we know she didn't do anything to provoke it. I think Chris Brown cops it because in his media appearances and statements he didn't seem particularly remorseful, and in his recent everythings he appears to be even more of a douchebag as ever.

I don't actually see where I suggested you were defending him, but ok dude.
At the end of the day I honestly don't really give a fuck what people think about Chris Brown. I choose to dislike him based on my own personal reasons. And what are you trying to prove with the Tupac thing? Should I like Chris Brown because Tupac raped someone? Does that mean I should then forgive Tupac because worse crimes have been committed? Derp.

Yes I am saying that you should like Chris Brown because Tupac is a rapist. Jeez, I must be typing with an accent again.
What I have been saying all along and I will try and make it even clearer for you. It is ridiculous that Chris Brown cannot move forward without being socially punished while a long line of others (e,g Tupac) are immune. If you cannot understand the hypocrisy then don't worry about it.
I could care less if you hate Chris Brown but you could at least take the time to get your facts right. You sound like a Woman's Day reader...

I don't think you can hold the fact that he didn't serve jail time against him personally.

If I was charged with a criminal offence I'd be trying to avoid jail as well.

yeah but with all due respect you seem like a decent together dude, and wouldnt put yourself in the position with which you had to try and avoid jail time let alone beat the hell out of your girlfriend in a very public way....whether he avoided jailtime or not, the question is whether the guy deserved it

Oh for sure, I totally agree. Fuck Chris Brown.

I was just trying to raise the question of wether people believe in redeption from time served.

I'm aware of Chris Brown's fuckheaded reaction to what he did.

and I reacted emotionally not objectivaly, was a good discussion point my apols

No, I oppose pillocks that refuse the facts. You say he wasn't punished which is incorrect. You say he never showed remorse, also incorrect. I don't know what reports you are talking about but the injured parties have all stated that Drake instigated the altercation.
I am not defending him at all and the suggestion is asinine. At the end of the day he fucked up big time and committed a crime and was punished for it. I have a problem with the internet knights of peace who choose to ignore reports and facts to suit their agenda.

In conclusion Tupac was a rapist, I give his albums negative 5 stars.

Punishment is somewhat of an umbrella term a lot like payment, theres a big difference between being paid $150 for a days work and $5......if somebody was charged with murder and payed a $2000 fine would you call that justice?, saying that the animal was justly punished for what is essentially grevious bodily harm by spending a few days picking up rubbish is pretty damn absurd.....and please good sir let me know which 'reports and facts' have been ignored

btw - how does Tupac raping a girl in anyway make chris brown immune from the consequences of beating a girl up?

Punishment is somewhat of an umbrella term a lot like payment, theres a big difference between being paid $150 for a days work and $5......if somebody was charged with murder and payed a $2000 fine would you call that justice?, saying that the animal was justly punished for what is essentially grevious bodily harm by spending a few days picking up rubbish is pretty damn absurd.....and please good sir let me know which 'reports and facts' have been ignored

btw - how does Tupac raping a girl in anyway make chris brown immune from the consequences of beating a girl up?

Seriously guy... have you heard of a strawman argument?
Unless they are a repeat offender they are more than likely not going to serve a custodial sentence for domestic assault. Maybe you should picket a few courthouses and protest the leniency...
These are the type of falsities I am referring to.
Chris Brown was not convicted, Chris Brown has never shown remorse, Chris Brown isn't on probation, He started the NY brawl, he called Frank Ocean a homo.
I would have no problem with all of the net justice if there was consistency.
Did Tupac have albums reviewed that even mentioned his previous crimes? Why is Tupac immune?

Seriously guy... have you heard of a strawman argument?
Unless they are a repeat offender they are more than likely not going to serve a custodial sentence for domestic assault. Maybe you should picket a few courthouses and protest the leniency...
These are the type of falsities I am referring to.
Chris Brown was not convicted, Chris Brown has never shown remorse, Chris Brown isn't on probation, He started the NY brawl, he called Frank Ocean a homo.
I would have no problem with all of the net justice if there was consistency.
Did Tupac have albums reviewed that even mentioned his previous crimes? Why is Tupac immune?

eh?, please ellaborate as to how I missrepresented you in any way, was just pointing out that totally ignoring the severity of the punishment (by arguing that the defendant was 'technically' punished) when discussing the consequences in relation to something as serious as felony assault is a fallacy by association all on its own

and by that logic you should start a fb in support of celebrity internet slander victims

These are the type of falsities I am referring to.
Chris Brown was not convicted, Chris Brown has never shown remorse, Chris Brown isn't on probation, He started the NY brawl, he called Frank Ocean a homo.
your right on every single point, my argument is that putting out a you tube video apologising to your victim and claiming remorse for your actions, seems pretty weak when you follow up by doing things like trashing a dressing room and abusing people when questioned about the incident coupled with the facing of robbery charges for recently snatching a girls I Phone, calling her a bitch and then driving off (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/chris-brown-robbery-snatches-fans-phone_n_1297368.html)......you really think picking up rubbish was a deterent for this guy?

I would have no problem with all of the net justice if there was consistency.
Did Tupac have albums reviewed that even mentioned his previous crimes? Why is Tupac immune? .....the guys been dead for over a decade, I really dont think a campaign of internet outrage is going to have too much affect

eh?, please ellaborate as to how I missrepresented you in any way, was just pointing out that totally ignoring the severity of the punishment (by arguing that the defendant was 'technically' punished) when discussing the consequences in relation to something as serious as felony assault is a fallacy by association all on its own

I don't think you understand what I mean by strawman. I should have just ignored you when you compared a sentence to a day's work.

Strawman = misrepresenting the original argument to draw focus to , or redirect attention to a distorted version of the original argument ?

The analogy your refering to was basically a pretty weird and abstract way of me trying to put the point across that when applicable, every action whether positive or negative should be met by a reaction of lawful equal measure within reason, but whatever,I think this is the first time ive interacted with you on this thing, so lets not ruin this first invigorating meeting with a slanging match over Chris Brown.

Your right that hes copping a bollocking a lot harder than others who have been in his position before, as for the rest I guess we can just agree to disagree, C'est la vie .

Los Angeles ink man Peter Koskela isn't happy about the attention his work has been receiving. "I hate when people misinterpret what I do," he told E! "It was really a blow to me to think that people would think so little of a person that I would actually put a picture of a beaten woman on his neck.

"That was crazy to me," he continued, "[the idea] that he would come to me and say, 'Hey, I want Rihanna's face on me.' I would never promote any kind of domestic violence like that. Even if he asked me to do it, I would have bounced right there. I don't do racist tattoos, I don't do gang-related tattoos and I don't do anything hurtful. That is just the motto I live by. The other tattoo artists might, but I just don't."

Los Angeles ink man Peter Koskela isn't happy about the attention his work has been receiving. "I hate when people misinterpret what I do," he told E! "It was really a blow to me to think that people would think so little of a person that I would actually put a picture of a beaten woman on his neck.

"That was crazy to me," he continued, "[the idea] that he would come to me and say, 'Hey, I want Rihanna's face on me.' I would never promote any kind of domestic violence like that. Even if he asked me to do it, I would have bounced right there. I don't do racist tattoos, I don't do gang-related tattoos and I don't do anything hurtful. That is just the motto I live by. The other tattoo artists might, but I just don't."

I've always listened to punk but went through a massive t shirt/tight black jeans stage about 7-8 years ago when I first went to uni. I had about 4 ramones ts, 2 clash, 1 sex pistols, 1 nofx, 1 rancid, 1 social d, 1 misfits all from this sweet shop in NZ which sold them for $10, living the dream back then!

after that I got fat so more suited the ozzy, sabbath, ac/dc and maiden ts

lost weight now and i'm onto indie ts maccabees, strokes, tv on the radio, kasabian, black keys all get frequent wear.